Abstract
The lack of evidence for new physics at the Large Hadron Collider so far has prompted the development of model-independent search techniques. In this study, we compare the anomaly scores of a variety of anomaly detection techniques: an isolation forest, a Gaussian mixture model, a static autoencoder, and a β-variational autoencoder (VAE), where we define the reconstruction loss of the latter as a weighted combination of regression and classification terms. We apply these algorithms to the 4-vectors of simulated LHC data, but also investigate the performance when the non-VAE algorithms are applied to the latent space variables created by the VAE. In addition, we assess the performance when the anomaly scores of these algorithms are combined in various ways. Using super- symmetric benchmark points, we find that the logical AND combination of the anomaly scores yielded from algorithms trained in the latent space of the VAE is the most effective discriminator of all methods tested.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
ATLAS collaboration, Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1 [arXiv:1207.7214] [INSPIRE].
CMS collaboration, Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30 [arXiv:1207.7235] [INSPIRE].
ATLAS collaboration, Summary of the ATLAS experiment’s sensitivity to supersymmetry after LHC Run 1 — interpreted in the phenomenological MSSM, JHEP 10 (2015) 134 [arXiv:1508.06608] [INSPIRE].
CMS collaboration, Phenomenological MSSM interpretation of CMS searches in pp collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 7 and 8 TeV, JHEP 10 (2016) 129 [arXiv:1606.03577] [INSPIRE].
GAMBIT collaboration, Global fits of GUT-scale SUSY models with GAMBIT, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 824 [arXiv:1705.07935] [INSPIRE].
GAMBIT collaboration, A global fit of the MSSM with GAMBIT, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 879 [arXiv:1705.07917] [INSPIRE].
GAMBIT collaboration, Combined collider constraints on neutralinos and charginos, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 395 [arXiv:1809.02097] [INSPIRE].
D0 collaboration, Search for new physics in eμX data at DØ using SLEUTH: A quasi-model-independent search strategy for new physics, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 092004 [hep-ex/0006011] [INSPIRE].
D0 collaboration, A Quasi model independent search for new physics at large transverse momentum, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 012004 [hep-ex/0011067] [INSPIRE].
D0 collaboration, A quasi-model-independent search for new high pT physics at DO, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 3712 [hep-ex/0011071] [INSPIRE].
D0 collaboration, Model independent search for new phenomena in p\( \overline{p} \) collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 1.96 TeV, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 092015 [arXiv:1108.5362] [INSPIRE].
H1 collaboration, A General search for new phenomena in ep scattering at HERA, Phys. Lett. B 602 (2004) 14 [hep-ex/0408044] [INSPIRE].
H1 collaboration, A General Search for New Phenomena at HERA, Phys. Lett. B 674 (2009) 257 [arXiv:0901.0507] [INSPIRE].
CDF collaboration, Model-Independent and Quasi-Model-Independent Search for New Physics at CDF, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 012002 [arXiv:0712.1311] [INSPIRE].
CDF collaboration, Global Search for New Physics with 2.0 fb−1 at CDF, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 011101 [arXiv:0809.3781] [INSPIRE].
G. Choudalakis, On hypothesis testing, trials factor, hypertests and the BumpHunter, in PHYSTAT 2011 Workshop on Statistical Issues Related to Discovery Claims in Search Experiments and Unfolding, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland, 17–20 January 2011 [arXiv:1101.0390] [INSPIRE].
ATLAS collaboration, A strategy for a general search for new phenomena using data-derived signal regions and its application within the ATLAS experiment, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 120 [arXiv:1807.07447] [INSPIRE].
CMS collaboration, MUSIC — An Automated Scan for Deviations between Data and Monte Carlo Simulation, CMS-PAS-EXO-08-005 (2008).
ATLAS collaboration, A model independent general search for new phenomena with the ATLAS detector at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV, ATLAS-CONF-2017-001 (2017).
P. Asadi, M.R. Buckley, A. DiFranzo, A. Monteux and D. Shih, Digging Deeper for New Physics in the LHC Data, JHEP 11 (2017) 194 [arXiv:1707.05783] [INSPIRE].
CMS collaboration, Model Unspecific Search for New Physics in pp Collisions at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 7 TeV, CMS-PAS-EXO-10-021 (2011).
R.T. D’Agnolo and A. Wulzer, Learning New Physics from a Machine, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 015014 [arXiv:1806.02350] [INSPIRE].
R.T. D’Agnolo, G. Grosso, M. Pierini, A. Wulzer and M. Zanetti, Learning multivariate new physics, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 89 [arXiv:1912.12155] [INSPIRE].
M. Farina, Y. Nakai and D. Shih, Searching for New Physics with Deep Autoencoders, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 075021 [arXiv:1808.08992] [INSPIRE].
T. Heimel, G. Kasieczka, T. Plehn and J.M. Thompson, QCD or What?, SciPost Phys. 6 (2019) 030 [arXiv:1808.08979] [INSPIRE].
J. Hajer, Y.-Y. Li, T. Liu and H. Wang, Novelty Detection Meets Collider Physics, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 076015 [arXiv:1807.10261] [INSPIRE].
M. Crispim Romão, N.F. Castro and R. Pedro, Finding New Physics without learning about it: Anomaly Detection as a tool for Searches at Colliders, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 27 [arXiv:2006.05432] [INSPIRE].
S. Kim, Y. Choi and M. Lee, Deep learning with support vector data description, Neurocomputing 165 (2015) 111.
O. Cerri, T.Q. Nguyen, M. Pierini, M. Spiropulu and J.-R. Vlimant, Variational Autoencoders for New Physics Mining at the Large Hadron Collider, JHEP 05 (2019) 036 [arXiv:1811.10276] [INSPIRE].
O. Knapp, O. Cerri, G. Dissertori, T.Q. Nguyen, M. Pierini and J.-R. Vlimant, Adversarially Learned Anomaly Detection on CMS Open Data: re-discovering the top quark, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136 (2021) 236 [arXiv:2005.01598] [INSPIRE].
M. Kuusela, T. Vatanen, E. Malmi, T. Raiko, T. Aaltonen and Y. Nagai, Semi-Supervised Anomaly Detection — Towards Model-Independent Searches of New Physics, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 368 (2012) 012032 [arXiv:1112.3329] [INSPIRE].
A. Andreassen, B. Nachman and D. Shih, Simulation Assisted Likelihood-free Anomaly Detection, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 095004 [arXiv:2001.05001] [INSPIRE].
B. Nachman and D. Shih, Anomaly Detection with Density Estimation, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 075042 [arXiv:2001.04990] [INSPIRE].
J.H. Collins, K. Howe and B. Nachman, Extending the search for new resonances with machine learning, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 014038 [arXiv:1902.02634] [INSPIRE].
L.M. Dery, B. Nachman, F. Rubbo and A. Schwartzman, Weakly Supervised Classification in High Energy Physics, JHEP 05 (2017) 145 [arXiv:1702.00414] [INSPIRE].
J.H. Collins, K. Howe and B. Nachman, Anomaly Detection for Resonant New Physics with Machine Learning, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 241803 [arXiv:1805.02664] [INSPIRE].
K. Benkendorfer, L.L. Pottier and B. Nachman, Simulation-assisted decorrelation for resonant anomaly detection, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 035003 [arXiv:2009.02205] [INSPIRE].
G. Brooijmans et al., Les Houches 2019 Physics at TeV Colliders: New Physics Working Group Report, in 11th Les Houches Workshop on Physics at TeV Colliders: PhysTeV Les Houches, (2020) [arXiv:2002.12220] [INSPIRE].
J. Alwall et al., The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP 07 (2014) 079 [arXiv:1405.0301] [INSPIRE].
NNPDF collaboration, Parton distributions for the LHC Run II, JHEP 04 (2015) 040 [arXiv:1410.8849] [INSPIRE].
T. Sjöstrand et al., An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2, Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159 [arXiv:1410.3012] [INSPIRE].
M.L. Mangano, M. Moretti, F. Piccinini and M. Treccani, Matching matrix elements and shower evolution for top-quark production in hadronic collisions, JHEP 01 (2007) 013 [hep-ph/0611129] [INSPIRE].
DELPHES 3 collaboration, DELPHES 3, A modular framework for fast simulation of a generic collider experiment, JHEP 02 (2014) 057 [arXiv:1307.6346] [INSPIRE].
ATLAS collaboration, Search for a scalar partner of the top quark in the all-hadronic t\( \overline{t} \) plus missing transverse momentum final state at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 737 [arXiv:2004.14060] [INSPIRE].
ATLAS collaboration, Search for a scalar partner of the top quark in the jets plus missing transverse momentum final state at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 12 (2017) 085 [arXiv:1709.04183] [INSPIRE].
CMS collaboration, Search for direct top squark pair production in events with one lepton, jets, and missing transverse momentum at 13 TeV with the CMS experiment, JHEP 05 (2020) 032 [arXiv:1912.08887] [INSPIRE].
F.T. Liu, K.M. Ting and Z. Zhou, Isolation forest, in 2008 Eighth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, pp. 413–422 (2008) [DOI].
B.R. Preiss, Data Structure and Algorithms: With Object-oriented Design Patterns in Java, John Wiley & Sons (1999).
G.J. McLachlan and D. Peel, Finite mixture models, John Wiley & Sons (2004).
A.P. Dempster, N.M. Laird and D.B. Rubin, Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the em algorithm, J. Roy. Statist. Soc. B 39 (1977) 1.
P. Vincent, H. Larochelle, Y. Bengio and P.-A. Manzagol, Extracting and composing robust features with denoising autoencoders, in Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML ’08, New York, NY, U.S.A., pp. 1096-1103, Association for Computing Machinery (2008) [DOI].
M. Sakurada and T. Yairi, Anomaly detection using autoencoders with nonlinear dimensionality reduction, in Proceedings of the MLSDA 2014 2nd Workshop on Machine Learning for Sensory Data Analysis, MLSDA’14, New York, NY, U.S.A., pp. 4–11, Association for Computing Machinery (2014) [DOI].
S. Kolouri, P.E. Pope, C.E. Martin and G.K. Rohde, Sliced-wasserstein autoencoder: An embarrassingly simple generative model, arXiv:1804.01947.
D.P. Kingma and M. Welling, Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes, arXiv:1312.6114 [INSPIRE].
S. Kullback, Information Theory and Statistics, Wiley, New York (1959).
I. Higgins et al., β-VAE: Learning basic visual concepts with a constrained variational framework, in ICLR 2017, Toulon, France (2017).
S. Otten et al., Event Generation and Statistical Sampling for Physics with Deep Generative Models and a Density Information Buffer, Nature Commun. 12 (2021) 2985 [arXiv:1901.00875] [INSPIRE].
K.P. Murphy, Machine learning: a probabilistic perspective, MIT Press, Cambridge (2013).
D.-A. Clevert, T. Unterthiner and S. Hochreiter, Fast and accurate deep network learning by exponential linear units (ELUs), arXiv:1511.07289.
T. Yu and H. Zhu, Hyper-parameter optimization: A review of algorithms and applications, arXiv:2003.05689.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
ArXiv ePrint: 2010.07940
Rights and permissions
Open Access . This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
van Beekveld, M., Caron, S., Hendriks, L. et al. Combining outlier analysis algorithms to identify new physics at the LHC. J. High Energ. Phys. 2021, 24 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2021)024
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2021)024